We performed a comparison between ReadyAPI and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has the ability to combine it with different CI/CD tools."
"ReadyAPI's best features are user-friendliness, smooth integration with Postman, the speed of creating test cases, and integration with customer data."
"When we are doing API testing we have found it to be very efficient to receive results. Additionally, you are able to do tests directly from the API."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the drag-and-drop options and the integration with versioning tool solutions, such as Git."
"It's easy to implement."
"This solution is very intuitive. Once you finish your first few testing cases, you can change several parameters and create lots of testing cases. You could use the same testing cases for different purposes such as automation, performance and screen testing."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are its robust functionality and collaboration capabilities."
"A single platform for functional testing, load testing security, and service actualization."
"The solution is mainly stable."
"It is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"In TestComplete, I saw a conformed package of a tool that kept everybody in consistency. The team was able to regenerate further tests without having to manipulate more code because the record feature is great."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"ReadyAPI can improve because it is limited to only SOAP and REST services. They should update the solution to include more protocols so that other people are not limited to SOAP and REST services. Other than would be able to utilize it."
"There is a lot of room for improvement, mainly from the point of view of integrating ReadyAPI into the CI pipelines, and also the scripting aspect into Bitbucket."
"Sometimes, if I changed something in ReadyAPI, it would not quickly pick up the change. It used to give me the same error repeatedly, and when I closed the application completely and restarted it, it would pick up that change."
"There is room for improvement in ReadyAPI, particularly in the user interface."
"Version control does not work well."
"Many users will consider this solution expensive compared to the layout. It is more expensive than other solutions."
"What needs improvement in ReadyAPI is its load testing feature because there was a hiccup when my team performed some load testing on the tool. My team had meetings with the ReadyAPI team and tried to get that issue fixed, but it still hasn't improved. This is a shortcoming of the tool, especially when you compare it with HP LoadRunner."
"Can be improved by including an inherent feature for UI automation."
"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."
"We were testing handheld barcode scanners running WindowsCE with many menus of warehouse functions, and our biggest problem was the timing between input and responses."
"The integration tools could be better."
"This solution could be improved by making it easier to visualize where there is a failure without having to look at it in detail."
"In scenarios where two of our engineers work on the same task, merging codes is a bit difficult."
"To bring it up to a 10, I would be looking for the addition of some key functional API testing."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
ReadyAPI is ranked 7th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 10th in Functional Testing Tools with 72 reviews. ReadyAPI is rated 7.8, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of ReadyAPI writes "Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". ReadyAPI is most compared with Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, ReadyAPI Test and Parasoft SOAtest, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and Telerik Test Studio. See our ReadyAPI vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.